Flymu2 Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 I saw an article today that the mag timing housing version of this unit was approved for the 550 and that the Eagle and Ovation are on the AML. Anyone have any thoughts or experience with this unit?
Oscar Avalle Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 I have been using a LASAR electronic ignition on my M20C (O 360 A1D) for the last 8 years. I like it, the engine starts up nicely and it runs smooth. Fuel consumption is down from what is was before by about .5 gal/hour. The only major problem I see is that the advanced timing of the unit raises the CHT in some cylinders by about 30 degrees, which in a M20C puts the CHT around 450 degrees during take off and climb on Cyl 3. I have been trying to find a solution to this issue until but to now to no avail. However, leaving this problem aside, I like to concept and the LASAR system. I understand that electroair is more sophisticated than the LASAR and is build with a solid state system. It is also not as expensive as the LASAR was in the past. On the other hand, LASAR keeps the two magnetos... which is nice.
triple8s Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 I would think that if a person were to fly very high it may help too as there are no breaker points to arc in the thin air. 1
jetdriven Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 it advances timing below 25" of MP, but the only real look at the system is by the CAFE foundation who installed the predecessor of this one on a M20E, and they found a small increase in the 10K altitude range. I spoke with Klaus Savier at OSH and he spoke with the Electroair guys a few times. Basically, he said that MP is only half of the equation. RPM is the other and if you ignore RPM in your timing lookup table, you give up half the gains that can be had. He is the guy who flew from CA to OSH and to Panama City (1700NM) in a 30 gallon airplane. 100 NMPG. http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2008/December/30/One-hundred-miles-per-gallon 1
carusoam Posted November 18, 2014 Report Posted November 18, 2014 EIS-61000-1M Continental 6 cyl Electronic Ignition Kit $5,500.00 Single Magneto Replacement - Mag Timing Housing (MTH) Single Engine Aircraft Continental 360, 470, 520 & 550 Series Engines http://www.electroair.net/stc_ignition_kit2.html Having only one... Seems like it would be similar to running on a single mag, no? ------------------- The EIS-61000 Electronic Ignition Kit is a fully STC'd kit for Continental 360, 470, 520, & 550 non-turbo’d, series engines, installed on single engine aircraft. Replacing one magneto with the EIS-61000 will typically improve fuel economy on average by 10-15% (operators have reported consistent fuel savings of 1.5-2.0 gph or greater). Additionally, there will be an improvement in horsepower, smoother engine operation, easier hot starts and improved high altitude performance. The EIS-61000 adjusts spark timing automatically by way of our MAP Sensor - timing is adjusted with altitude. Most parts on the EIS-61000 are not life limited (reference the I.C.A. for recommended maintenance) - this combined with reduced spark plug fouling means lower maintenance costs. This kit can be used on either 12V or 24V systems. This kit uses a Mag Timing Housing (MTH) for firing the ignition system. The MTH unit directly replaces one of the magnetos on the accessory pad. Kit includes: all the required parts to replace one magneto. (Please refer to the eligibility schedule to verify the system can be installed on your engine - Note: aircraft and engines are being added regularly). Call 1.866.494.3002 ---------------------------------------------–– I hope they compare LOP v LOP w/ electronic ignition. Not ROP v LOP w/ electronic ignition... The IO550 runs LOP very nicely without electronic ignition... Sorry for the goofy questions... Best regards, -a-
Cris Posted November 18, 2014 Report Posted November 18, 2014 I saw an article today that the mag timing housing version of this unit was approved for the 550 and that the Eagle and Ovation are on the AML. Anyone have any thoughts or experience with this unit? Dennis Where did you see hat approval. It is not on the Electroaire website unless I missed it somehow.?
Flymu2 Posted November 18, 2014 Author Report Posted November 18, 2014 Dennis Where did you see hat approval. It is not on the Electroaire website unless I missed it somehow.? I saw it on the COPA website. Carusoam above has the product listing from the Electroair website. They also post the AML, which shows the approval for the M20R and M20S as of 11/5/14.
kmyfm20s Posted November 18, 2014 Report Posted November 18, 2014 Here is a link to the FAQ's about EI's. http://www.ameritech-aviation.com/faq.pdf Also there is a discussion on Beechtalk about it with input from a few Mooney installations. http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=88219
jetdriven Posted November 18, 2014 Report Posted November 18, 2014 I only see one mooney installation. And he runs ROP and climbs 25 square, I'd be suspect of his data.
Cris Posted November 19, 2014 Report Posted November 19, 2014 I called Electroaire. They said yes it is approved and STC'ed for the IO550 TCM Mooney but they are behind on their web site so the info is not shown as of yet. They sell thru distributors and you can get a better price as opposed to buying direct. The kit from a local distributor was quoted to me at 4950. I think the list is 5500 or 5800 . They estimate 8-20 hrs on the install for your IA. Essentially three days down time with the third day related to flight testing and adjustments.
carusoam Posted November 19, 2014 Report Posted November 19, 2014 Does anyone see any dis-advantage of only having one? I would expect that good LOP cruise data is key to it's success... Best regards, -a-
Flymu2 Posted November 19, 2014 Author Report Posted November 19, 2014 Does anyone see any dis-advantage of only having one? I would expect that good LOP cruise data is key to it's success... Best regards, -a- The data on Electroair's website says that one electronic ignition gives 70-80% of the benefit of two.
Piloto Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 How much faster will it make my M20J? How does it changes the firing time when the other magneto is the old fix timing one?. With the electronic ignition there is an added cause of failure that was not there before, 14/24 VDC supply failure. For what it cost I can get the ADS-B out enchilada. José
Andy95W Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 Jose- I'm right there with you on the price issue. You should take a look at their website, however. Very impressive claims. And the Aviation Consumer folks seemed to be very impressed. I'm keeping my magnetos, but if I hit the lottery and the next day I lose a mag, I'll get the Electroair system without hesitation.
kmyfm20s Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 How much faster will it make my M20J? How does it changes the firing time when the other magneto is the old fix timing one?. With the electronic ignition there is an added cause of failure that was not there before, 14/24 VDC supply failure. For what it cost I can get the ADS-B out enchilada. José With exception of the first 1000 feet the magneto is firing in the back ground. If you run ROP you burn less fuel, if you run LOP you can further away from peak with fewer miss fires as I have read. It doesn't take away the need to have a good GAMI spread. From the website; The electronic ignition always fires at 20-25 degrees (depending on engine model) or earlier while advancing timing. Magnetos are set to fire at 20-25 degrees, period (depending on engine model). So the spark is already going when the magneto fires and hence has very little effect.
carusoam Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 The challenge comes from one plug doing one thing different then the other... Both plugs firing together produce smooth operations. I think? (Using run-up experience is a bit crude) Where's are guy with the background in flame fronts...? Best regards, -a-
Flymu2 Posted November 20, 2014 Author Report Posted November 20, 2014 The challenge comes from one plug doing one thing different then the other... Both plugs firing together produce smooth operations. I think? (Using run-up experience is a bit crude) Where's are guy with the background in flame fronts...? Best regards, -a- According to Electroair's website, the spark from the electronic ignition is hotter, longer, and more advanced than that from the magneto. Thus most if not all of the charge in the cylinder is consumed before the mag spark occurs. Thus the mag spark is "wasted" in the sense that it has no effect since there's nothing left to burn. 1
Cruiser Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 The only data I can find on this is from the CAFE tests run on the Mooney J with the IO360 Lycoming. Granted the physics should be the same for all engines so maybe it is applicable to the Continental IO 550. Even so, from the quick look I had, it seems there is little to no benefit in TAS or FF when operating LOP. It appears from their testing the performance was due to increasing the timing to 30° BTDC, I could find no graph or data that showed ICP values. From some of the CHT curves it would appear from the higher values that ICP is greater, especially ROP. I certainly would want to know more about this condition before committing to using the system. It looks to be that there is very little value to this system from a performance point of view when operating LOP, safety, startup, mis-fire, dependability etc. aside.
carusoam Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 Improved starting? Would there be a reason to run e-ignition on the top plugs vs 1/2 top and 1/2 bottom plugs? What's left? Seems expensive with very little known benefit for me. Best regards, -a-
kmyfm20s Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 My mags are working great for me at this time. If I have I have a problem in the future the EI looks like an good option. Planes that don't run well LOP and have to run ROP I see benefits with EI in fuel savings below 8500'. FF, ROP vs LOP over 8500' is close enough that the benifits are not that great. I don't run ROP except for climbs and over 8500' and I have enough excess horse power below 8500' that I exclusively run LOP. My plane runs sufficiently well LOP I don't see the need to run further away from peak. Hot starts have not been a problem for me and even on a day like today when I visited 3 different offices I did not have a problem getting my plane going. I have had a few instances when I stopped for fuel and had quick turnarounds that I have had trouble getting the plane fired up right away, EI would have definatly been nice then. I do believe EI is a superior spark source but Im not sure it has superior benefits to switch out one of my mags unless I have a problem with one of them. In regards to the IO-360 with the D mag it could be a good option for some comfort in redundancy of sorts. Also having the EI be the source for the lower plugs I could see the benefit for the plug fouling problems some people have.
GeorgePerry Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 On 11/17/2014 at 5:37 PM, Flymu2 said: I saw an article today that the mag timing housing version of this unit was approved for the 550 and that the Eagle and Ovation are on the AML. Anyone have any thoughts or experience with this unit? Did you ever do the install? I plan on stopping by their booth at Osh this year to see what I can find out.
aviatoreb Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 16 minutes ago, GeorgePerry said: Did you ever do the install? I plan on stopping by their booth at Osh this year to see what I can find out. George, please do ask their thoughts and if any examples, of their units installed in turbo engines.
Recommended Posts